1
|
Edmonds SW, Cullen L, DeBerg J. The Problem with the Pyramid for Grading Evidence: The Evidence Funnel Solution. J Perianesth Nurs 2024; 39:484-488. [PMID: 38823963 DOI: 10.1016/j.jopan.2023.10.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2023] [Accepted: 10/28/2023] [Indexed: 06/03/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie W Edmonds
- Nurse Scientist, Nursing Administration, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, part of Allina Health, Minneapolis, MN
| | - Laura Cullen
- Evidence-Based Practice Scientist, Department of Nursing Services and Patient Care, University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics.
| | - Jennifer DeBerg
- User Services Librarian, Hardin Library for Health Sciences, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
He Y, Zhang R, Shan W, Yin Y, Zhang X, Zhang Y, Wang X. Evaluating the completeness of the reporting of abstracts since the publication of the CONSORT extension for abstracts: an evaluation of randomized controlled trial in ten nursing journals. Trials 2023; 24:423. [PMID: 37349754 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-023-07419-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2022] [Accepted: 05/27/2023] [Indexed: 06/24/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND As a practice-oriented discipline, strict adherence to reporting guidelines is particularly important in randomized controlled trial (RCT) abstracts of the nursing area. However, whether abstract reports after 2010 have complied with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials for Abstracts (CONSORT-A) guideline is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate whether the publication of CONSORT-A has improved abstract reporting in nursing and explores the factors associated with better adherence to the guidelines. METHODS We searched the Web of Science for 200 RCTs randomly selected from ten nursing journals. We used a data extraction form based on CONSORT-A, including 16 items, to analyze the reporting adherence to the guidelines, and the reporting rate of each item and the total score for each abstract were used to indicate adherence and overall quality score (OQS, range 0-16). A comparison of the total mean score between the two periods was made, and affecting factors were analyzed. RESULTS In the studies we included, 48 abstracts were published pre-CONSORT-A whereas 152 post-CONSORT-A. The overall mean score for reporting adherence to 16 items was 7.41 ± 2.78 and 9.16 ± 2.76 for pre- and post-CONSORT-A, respectively (total score: 16). The most poorly reported items are "harms (0%)," "outcomes in method (8.5%)," "randomization (25%)," and "blinding (6.5%)." Items including the year of publication, impact factor, multiple center trial, word count, and structured abstract are significantly associated with higher adherence. CONCLUSIONS The adherence to abstract reporting in nursing literature has improved since the CONSORT-A era, but the overall completeness of RCT abstracts remained low. A joint effort by authors, editors, and journals is necessary to improve reporting quality of RCT abstracts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yan He
- Health Human Resources Service Center, Health Commission of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, Gansu, 730000, China
| | - Rong Zhang
- School of Nursing, Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu, China
| | - Wenjing Shan
- Oncology Department, Nursing, Xi'an International Medical Center, Xi'an, 710000, Shaanxi, China
| | - Yuhuan Yin
- School of Nursing, Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu, China
| | - Xiaoli Zhang
- School of Nursing, Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu, China
| | - Yiyin Zhang
- School of Nursing, Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu, China
| | - Xiaoping Wang
- Urological Examination Room, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu, China.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Villa M, Le Pera M, Cassina T, Bottega M. Reporting quality of abstracts from randomised controlled trials published in leading critical care nursing journals: a methodological quality review. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e070639. [PMID: 36921935 PMCID: PMC10030738 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-070639] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/17/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the methodological quality of randomised controlled trial (RCT) abstracts in leading critical care nursing journals against the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-Abstracts (CONSORT-A) checklist and to identify variables related with abstract reporting quality. DESIGN Descriptive methodological quality review. DATA SOURCE We searched the PubMed database and the websites of each included journal. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA We included RCT abstracts published between 2011 and 2021 in the first 11 Scopus-ranking (2021) critical care nursing journals that reported the results of RCTs in English that referred to the care of adult patients with acute/critical illness or their relatives and/or caregivers and conducted in ICUs. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Two independent investigators extracted the data using a prespecified 17-item checklist directly derived from CONSORT-A. For the primary outcome, each item was evaluated whether it was adequately reported or not and descriptive statistics were reported. An overall score was calculated by summing the results of all items and multivariate linear regression was conducted to detect potential predictors. RESULTS Seventy-eight RCT abstracts were included in this review. The items with the highest CONSORT-A adherence were authors, objective, conclusion, participants, interventions and outcome. The randomisation item had the lowest CONSORT-A adherence, followed by trial registration, funding source, harms or side effects, recruitment, blinding and outcome results. The average CONSORT-A score was 8.5±1.5 points (of the maximum 17.5 points). Multivariate analysis indicated that the categorised word score and publication date were positively associated with the overall CONSORT-A score, while the first author's country being in Asia was negatively associated with the overall CONSORT-A score. CONCLUSIONS The 78 RCT abstracts showed poor overall adherence to CONSORT-A. The results indicate that the methodological reporting quality of RCT abstracts in critical care nursing journals requires improvement to facilitate assessment of the applicability and relevance of the results reported.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michele Villa
- Cardiocentro Ticino Institute, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Lugano, Ticino, Switzerland
| | - Massimo Le Pera
- Cardiocentro Ticino Institute, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Lugano, Ticino, Switzerland
| | - Tiziano Cassina
- Cardiocentro Ticino Institute, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Lugano, Ticino, Switzerland
| | - Michela Bottega
- Dipartimento funzionale delle risorse umane, Azienda ULSS n 2 Marca Trevigiana, Treviso, Veneto, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Jull A, Walker N. Trial registration and time to publication in a retrospective cohort of publicly funded randomised controlled trials in New Zealand 1999-2017. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e065050. [PMID: 36202579 PMCID: PMC9540847 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine how quickly randomised controlled trials funded by the Health Research Council of New Zealand (HRC) were registered and published, and whether time to publication differed by trial result. DESIGN We created a retrospective cohort of trials offered funding from 1999 to 2017 by seeking lists of candidate studies using the Official Information Act 1982. These lists were supplemented by searching the HRC's online research repository and an open-access database on Figshare. One investigator searched for trial registrations and for dissemination using electronic databases, university websites and ResearchGate. One investigator extracted data from the obtained studies and a second investigator independently corroborated the data entry from a 10% random sample. RESULTS We identified 258 trials that were offered funding, 252 trials were conducted and 229 (90.9%) were registered, 179 prospectively by the date of the final search (24 March 2022). Overall, 236 trials were completed by the date of the last search and in 209 (88.6%) trials the results had been disseminated, 200 (84.7%) of which were by journal publication. We obtained the results for 214 trials, 91 (42.5%) of which were positive, 120 (56.1%) of which were null and 3 (1.4%) of which were negative. Median time to publication was 22.7 months for positive trials and 21.5 months for combined null or negative trials (log rank test p=0.83). Median time since trial completion in the trials that had not been published was 43.6 months (IQR 17.1-108.2 months). CONCLUSIONS Between 1999 and 2017, almost 9 out of every 10 HRC-funded trials had been registered and a similar proportion of completed trials had been published with no difference in time to publication based on type of result. However, only a slim majority of trials had published within the 2-year time frame set by the WHO.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew Jull
- School of Nursing, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
- National Institute for Health Innovation, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Natalie Walker
- National Institute for Health Innovation, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Tikka C, Verbeek J, Ijaz S, Hoving JL, Boschman J, Hulshof C, de Boer AG. Quality of reporting and risk of bias: a review of randomised trials in occupational health. Occup Environ Med 2021; 78:691-696. [PMID: 34162718 PMCID: PMC8380877 DOI: 10.1136/oemed-2020-107038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2020] [Accepted: 04/22/2021] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
Objectives To assess the reporting quality of randomisation and allocation methods in occupational health and safety (OHS) trials in relation to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) requirements of journals, risk of bias (RoB) and publication year. Methods We systematically searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed between 2010 and May 2019 in 18 OHS journals. We measured reporting quality as percentage compliance with the CONSORT 2010 checklist (items 8–10) and RoB with the ROB V.2.0 tool (first domain). We tested the mean difference (MD) in % in reporting quality between CONSORT-requiring and non-requiring journals, trials with low, some concern and high RoB and publications before and after 2015. Results In 135 articles reporting on 129 RCTs, average reporting quality was at 37.4% compliance (95% CI 31.9% to 43.0%), with 10% of articles reaching 100% compliance. Reporting quality was significantly better in CONSORT-requiring journals than non-requiring journals (MD 31.0% (95% CI 21.4% to 40.7%)), for studies at low RoB than high RoB (MD 33.1% (95% CI 16.1% to 50.2%)) and with RoB of some concern (MD 39.8% (95% CI 30.0% to 49.7%)). Reporting quality did not improve over time (MD −5.7% (95% CI −16.8% to 5.4%). Conclusions Articles in CONSORT-requiring journals and of low RoB studies show better reporting quality. Low reporting quality is linked to unclear RoB judgements (some concern). Reporting quality did not improve over the last 10 years and CONSORT is insufficiently implemented. Concerted efforts by editors and authors are needed to improve CONSORT implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christina Tikka
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands .,Occupational health department, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (FIOH), Kuopio Regional Office, Kuopio, Finland
| | - Jos Verbeek
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Cochrane Work Review Group, Amsterdam UMC Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sharea Ijaz
- NIHR ARC West, University of Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Jan L Hoving
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Cochrane Work Review Group, Amsterdam UMC Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Julitta Boschman
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Cochrane Work Review Group, Amsterdam UMC Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Carel Hulshof
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Angela G de Boer
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Que WC, Qiu HQ, Chen HY, Wang SZ, Cheng Y, Liao LM. Systematic evaluation of therapeutic effects of stem cell transplantation trials for heart diseases in China. Clin Transplant 2020; 34:e14051. [PMID: 32946605 DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2020] [Accepted: 07/20/2020] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To systematically assess the quality of reports of clinical trials of stem cell for heart diseases published in Chinese. METHODS The quality of reports was assessed according to the CONSORT statement and the Jadad score. The association between the CONSORT scores and the reported therapeutic effects was evaluated. RESULTS A total of 36 randomized clinical trials were identified, and 1552 patients were included. The mean CONSORT score was 7.06 (SD = 2.99). The proportion of reports with a Jadad score of 3 was 8.33%. The improvement of left ventricular function, myocardial perfusion area, left ventricular diastolic diameter, and cardiac output decreased with the increase in the CONSORT score. CONCLUSIONS The percentages of high-quality reports published in Chinese on stem cell therapy for heart diseases are low. Although stem cell transplantation seems promising for heart diseases, high-quality studies are needed to verify the conclusions..
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wan-Cai Que
- Department of Pharmacy, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China
| | - Hong-Qiang Qiu
- Department of Pharmacy, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China
| | - Hui-Yun Chen
- Affiliated People's Hospital of Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fuzhou, China
| | - Shao-Zhen Wang
- Affiliated People's Hospital of Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fuzhou, China
| | - Yu Cheng
- Department of Pharmacy, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China
| | - Lian-Ming Liao
- Center of Laboratory Medicine, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Tam W, Lo K, Woo B. Reporting sample size calculations for randomized controlled trials published in nursing journals: A cross-sectional study. Int J Nurs Stud 2019; 102:103450. [PMID: 31731176 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.103450] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2019] [Revised: 10/10/2019] [Accepted: 10/12/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prior sample size calculation is essential to ensure that a randomized controlled trial (RCT) has enough power to detect any statistical differences between two groups while not over-recruiting participants. However, the compliance among RCTs published in nursing field is unknown. OBJECTIVE To describe the reporting of sample size methodology and parameters used in RCTs published in nursing journals. DESIGN A cross-sectional database search of all RCTs published in nursing journals was conducted. SETTING 116 journals in the category of nursing. PARTICIPANTS Not applicable. METHODS A database search was conducted to identify all RCTs published in nursing journals from January 2016 to December 2016. Two-arm RCTs were reviewed to see if sample size estimation was mentioned in the text and if the parameters were sufficient for the estimation. For RCTs with effect size, sample sizes were recomputed and compared with the reported size. RESULTS Two hundred and twenty-three RCTs were included in this study, and 143 (64.1%) studies mentioned how they obtained their sample sizes. Among these 143 studies, 132 (92.3%), 133 (93.0%), 33 (23.1%), and 84 (58.7%) specified their levels of significance (α), powers, tails of the test, and effect size related information, respectively. Only 22 (15.4%) provided all the necessary parameters to compute their sample sizes. Out of the 84 RCTs with effect size information, 49 (58.3%) had a relative difference of less than 25%. DISCUSSION Around 36% of the RCTs published in nursing journals did not report how they reached their sample sizes. For those that had reported, only 15% provided all the necessary parameters to re-compute their sizes. It is concluded that the methodology and parameters used for sample size determination are inadequately reported in RCTs published in nursing journals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wilson Tam
- Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
| | - Kenneth Lo
- Department of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Hypertension Research Laboratory, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Coronary Heart Disease Prevention, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou 510080, China; Centre for Global Cardiometabolic Health, Department of Epidemiology, Brown University, USA.
| | - Brigitte Woo
- Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Shaikh AM, Mehta MM, Chawan VV. Evaluation of reporting of CONSORT flow diagrams in randomized controlled trials in a national and international pharmacology journal. Perspect Clin Res 2019; 10:168-171. [PMID: 31649866 PMCID: PMC6801991 DOI: 10.4103/picr.picr_73_18] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate and compare the reporting of consolidated standard of reporting trial (CONSORT) flow diagrams in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in a national and international pharmacology journal. METHODS RCTs in an international pharmacology journal, European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (EJCP), and a national journal, Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP), published from January 2014 to July 2016 were evaluated for reporting and completeness of CONSORT flow diagrams. A total of 138 articles (EJCP = 90; IJP = 48) were analyzed and compared. RESULTS Of 138 RCTs analyzed, 90 were from EJCP and 48 were from IJP. 76.6% (69/90) articles from EJCP and 37.5% (18/48) articles from IJP had reported the CONSORT flow diagram. Of these, 95.5% (66/69) had assessed for eligibility in EJCP and 88.8% (16/18) had reported the same in IJP. The number of participants excluded was reported in 86.9% (60/69) flow diagrams in EJCP and 83.3% (15/18) in IJP. 82.6% (57/69) flow diagrams in EJCP and 77.7% (14/18) in IJP had mentioned the details of randomization. Allocation of intervention was reported in 91.3% (63/69) flow diagrams in EJCP and 88.8% (16/18) in IJP. 60.8% (42/69) flow diagrams in EJCP and 44.4% (08/18) in IJP had mentioned the details of follow-up of participants. 95.5% (66/69) flow diagrams in EJCP and 94.4% (17/18) in IJP had mentioned details about analysis. CONCLUSION In spite of both the journals, IJP and EJCP endorsing the CONSORT statement, a significant difference in the reporting of CONSORT flow diagrams in RCTs can be noted. The quality of reporting can be improved by stringent publication guidelines by the editors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Asif Moeed Shaikh
- Department of Pharmacology, Topiwala National Medical College and BYL Nair Charitable Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Manthan M Mehta
- Department of Pharmacology, Topiwala National Medical College and BYL Nair Charitable Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Vihang V Chawan
- Department of Pharmacology, Topiwala National Medical College and BYL Nair Charitable Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Ritchie A, Seubert L, Clifford R, Perry D, Bond C. Do randomised controlled trials relevant to pharmacy meet best practice standards for quality conduct and reporting? A systematic review. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACY PRACTICE 2019; 28:220-232. [PMID: 31573121 DOI: 10.1111/ijpp.12578] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2018] [Accepted: 08/06/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Evidence-based pharmacy practice requires a dependable evidence base. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard of high-quality primary research, and tools exist to assist researchers in conducting and reporting high-quality RCTs. This review aimed to explore whether RCTs relevant to pharmacy are conducted and reported in line with Cochrane risk of bias and CONSORT standards, respectively. METHODS A MEDLINE search identified potential papers. After screening of titles, abstracts and full texts, the 50 most recent papers were reviewed and assessment of bias according to Cochrane domains and compliance with CONSORT checklist items was recorded. Each domain of the Cochrane tool and CONSORT checklist item and each article were given a percentage score, reported as median and interquartile range (IQR). Correlation between quality of conduct, quality of reporting, continent of origin, and journal impact factor was conducted using the R2 statistic. The median domain score for risk of bias by paper according to the Cochrane risk of bias tool was 53.0% (IQR 38.5-68.5), while the median compliance score by paper for the CONSORT checklist was 64.0% (IQR 36.0-94.0%). KEY FINDINGS The median Cochrane domain and median CONSORT item completion scores, respectively, were 50.0% (IQR 33.3-66.7%) and 59.5% (IQR 52.0-70.3%). The highest risk of bias was associated with allocation concealment and blinding, and the least well-reported items were randomisation details, sequence generation and allocation concealment. A positive relationship between conduct and reporting of RCTs was found (R2 = 0.75), while no correlation was found between quality of conduct or quality of reporting and journal impact factor, correlation coefficients (R2 = 0.06 and R2 = 0.05, respectively). SUMMARY This review identified that issues related to randomisation and blinding are often inadequately conducted or not comprehensively reported by researchers conducting pharmacy relevant RCTs, providing useful information for education and future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison Ritchie
- Division of Pharmacy, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia
| | - Liza Seubert
- Division of Pharmacy, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia
| | - Rhonda Clifford
- School of Allied Health, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia
| | - Danae Perry
- Division of Pharmacy, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia
| | - Christine Bond
- Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Adverse event reporting and trial registration in venous leg ulcer trials published since the 2001 CONSORT statement revision: A systematic review. J Tissue Viability 2019; 29:155-160. [PMID: 31587922 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtv.2019.09.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2019] [Revised: 09/13/2019] [Accepted: 09/26/2019] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
AIM To be in accord with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement, all important adverse events in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) should be reported, as well as trial registration. Neither concern has been investigated in venous leg ulcer trials. We therefore aimed to quantify and explore compliance with adverse event reporting and trials registration in RCTs that reported interventions for treating venous leg ulceration. MATERIALS AND METHODS We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, Embase, and CINAHL for studies reported between 2001 and 2017. Included studies must have been described as randomised controlled trials evaluating any intervention in a VLU population. Data was then extracted by one author into a standard form and checked by a second author. RESULTS We screened 3100 titles and identified 204 trials involving pharmaceuticals (82), medicated and non-medicated devices (102), organisational (5) or other interventions (15) published in 76 journals. Eighty-four trials reported adverse events (41.2%), while 18 reported no events occurred (8.8%) and 78 did not report adverse events (38.2%). Types of adverse events reported included all-cause (20.1%), ulcer-related only (38.2%), treatment-related only (11.3%) and serious adverse events only (1.0%). Only 38 trials were registered (18.6%). Trial registration was associated with reporting of any adverse events (Odds Ratio 3.0, 95%CI 1.1-7.9), as was the trial being a pharmaceutical trial (Odds Ratio 2.9, 95%CI 1.5-5.7) or a multicentre trial (Odds Ratio 4.2, 95%CI 2.2-8.1). CONCLUSION Adverse event reporting in VLU trials is variable with about one third of trials not reporting on adverse events at all. Trials registration is a the modifiable factor associated with better reporting of adverse events. Journal editors could explore how they can promote trials registration to enhance better reporting of harms in VLU trials.
Collapse
|
11
|
Madden K, Phillips M, Solow M, McKinnon V, Bhandari M. A systematic review of quality of reporting in registered intimate partner violence studies: where can we improve? J Inj Violence Res 2019; 11:123-136. [PMID: 31129675 PMCID: PMC6646831 DOI: 10.5249/jivr.v11i2.1140] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2018] [Accepted: 05/06/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Reporting quality is paramount when presenting clinical findings in published research to ensure that we have the highest quality of evidence. Poorly reported clinical findings can result in a number of potential pitfalls, including confusion of the methodology used or selective reporting of study results. There are guidelines and checklists that aim to standardize the way in which studies are reported in the literature to ensure transparency. The use of these reporting guidelines may aid in the appropriate reporting of research, which is of increased importance in highly complex fields like intimate partner violence (IPV). The primary objective of this systematic review is to assess the reporting quality of published IPV studies using the CONSORT and STROBE checklists. METHODS We performed a systematic review of three large study registries for IPV studies. Of the completed studies, we sought full text publications and used reporting checklists to assess the quality of reporting. RESULTS Of the 42 randomized controlled trials, the mean score on the CONSORT checklist was 63.5% (23.5/37 items, SD 4.7 items). There were also 12 pilot trials in this systematic review, which scored a mean of 49.3% (19.7/40 items; SD 3.3 items) on the CONSORT extension for pilot trials. We included 12 observational studies which scored a mean of 56.1% (18.5/33 items; SD: 4.1 items). CONCLUSIONS We identified an opportunity to improve reporting quality by encouraging adherence to reporting guidelines. There should be a particular focus on ensuring that pilot studies report pilot-specific items. All researchers have a responsibility to ensure commitment to high quality reporting to ensure transparency in IPV studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kim Madden
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Blanco D, Altman D, Moher D, Boutron I, Kirkham JJ, Cobo E. Scoping review on interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e026589. [PMID: 31076472 PMCID: PMC6527996 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026589] [Citation(s) in RCA: 107] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The goal of this study is to identify, analyse and classify interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in order to obtain a wide picture of how the problem of enhancing the completeness of reporting of biomedical literature has been tackled so far. DESIGN Scoping review. SEARCH STRATEGY We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases and conducted a grey literature search for (1) studies evaluating interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research and (2) other types of references describing interventions that have been performed or suggested but never evaluated. The characteristics and effect of the evaluated interventions were analysed. Moreover, we explored the rationale of the interventions identified and determined the existing gaps in research on the evaluation of interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines. RESULTS 109 references containing 31 interventions (11 evaluated) were included. These were grouped into five categories: (1) training on the use of reporting guidelines, (2) improving understanding, (3) encouraging adherence, (4) checking adherence and providing feedback, and (5) involvement of experts. Additionally, we identified lack of evaluated interventions (1) on training on the use of reporting guidelines and improving their understanding, (2) at early stages of research and (3) after the final acceptance of the manuscript. CONCLUSIONS This scoping review identified a wide range of strategies to improve adherence to reporting guidelines that can be taken by different stakeholders. Additional research is needed to assess the effectiveness of many of these interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Blanco
- Statistics and Operations Research, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Doug Altman
- Nuffield Department ofOrthopaedics, Rheumatologyand Musculoskeletal Sciences,Centre for Statistics in Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - David Moher
- Centre for Journalology, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Isabelle Boutron
- Centre d\'épidémiologie Clinique, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France
| | - Jamie J Kirkham
- Biostatistics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, Merseyside, UK
| | - Erik Cobo
- Statistics and Operations Research, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Azar M, Riehm KE, Saadat N, Sanchez T, Chiovitti M, Qi L, Rice DB, Levis B, Fedoruk C, Levis AW, Kloda LA, Kimmelman J, Benedetti A, Thombs BD. Evaluation of Journal Registration Policies and Prospective Registration of Randomized Clinical Trials of Nonregulated Health Care Interventions. JAMA Intern Med 2019; 179:624-632. [PMID: 30855655 PMCID: PMC6503638 DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.8009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Many interventions that are important to the health care of patients are not subject to regulation by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or comparable regulatory bodies in other nations. OBJECTIVE To determine whether specialty journals that publish trials of primarily nonregulated health care interventions require prospective registration and whether the prospective registration policies are associated with the publication of prospectively registered trials, trials with adequately registered outcomes, and trials with primary outcomes consistent with the registered primary outcomes. DESIGN AND METHODS PubMed was searched daily, from March 18, 2016, to September 17, 2016, for nonregulated intervention randomized clinical trials. The search included all journals in the Clarivate Analytics Science Citation Index Expanded categories of behavioral sciences, nursing, nutrition and dietetics, psychology, rehabilitation, and surgery. Trials of interventions not subject to FDA regulation were included. One investigator extracted journal registration policy and trial registration status. Two investigators independently extracted trial registration and publication characteristics. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES For journals, the main outcome was the trial registration policy. For trials, the main outcomes were prospective registration, adequacy of outcome registration, and concordance of registered with published primary outcomes. RESULTS In total, 953 nonregulated intervention trials published in 254 journals were identified. Prospective registration was required for publication by 29 (11.4%) of 254 journals, and an additional 12 journals (4.7%) had conditional date-based requirements. Only 189 (19.8%) of the 953 trials were registered prospectively, including 33 of 98 published in journals with prospective registration policies as compared with 156 of 855 in journals without policies (33.7% vs 18.2%; P = .004). Among the 17 journals that required prospective registration and had at least 2 included trials, none had a prospective registration of more than 50%. In journals with policies, only 3 of 98 trials included primary outcomes consistent with prospectively, adequately registered outcomes, as compared with 34 of 852 trials in journals without policies (3.1% vs 4.0%; P = .62). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Few journals in behavioral sciences or psychology, nursing, nutrition and dietetics, rehabilitation, and surgery require prospective trial registration, and those with existing registration policies rarely enforce them; this finding suggests that strategies for encouraging prospective registration of clinical trials not subject to FDA regulation should be developed and tested.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marleine Azar
- Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Kira E Riehm
- Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Nazanin Saadat
- Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Tatiana Sanchez
- Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Matthew Chiovitti
- Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Lin Qi
- Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Danielle B Rice
- Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Brooke Levis
- Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Claire Fedoruk
- Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Alexander W Levis
- Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Lorie A Kloda
- Library, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Jonathan Kimmelman
- Studies of Translation, Ethics and Medicine, Biomedical Ethics Unit, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Andrea Benedetti
- Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,Respiratory Epidemiology and Clinical Research Unit, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Brett D Thombs
- Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,Department of Educational and Counselling Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Kechter A, Amaro H, Black DS. Reporting of Treatment Fidelity in Mindfulness-Based Intervention Trials: A Review and New Tool using NIH Behavior Change Consortium Guidelines. Mindfulness (N Y) 2019; 10:215-233. [PMID: 30854147 PMCID: PMC6402837 DOI: 10.1007/s12671-018-0974-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 66] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) are in the fourth decade of adaptation and testing, yet little is known about their level of treatment fidelity. Treatment fidelity is a methodological strategy used to monitor and enhance the reliability and validity of behavioral interventions. The Treatment Fidelity Workgroup of the National Institutes of Health Behavior Change Consortium (BCC) put forth recommendations covering five components of treatment fidelity: design, training, delivery, receipt, and enactment. We conducted a literature review to describe how these five components of treatment fidelity are reported in published main outcomes articles of MBI efficacy trials among adult participants. Our search yielded 202 articles and we identified 25 (12%) described study treatment fidelity. All 25 studies reported on design, n=24 (96%) reported on training, n=23 (92%) reported on delivery, n=23 (92%) reported on receipt, and n=16 (64%) reported on enactment. Eleven (44%) articles analyzed measures of receipt and enactment with a participant outcome. Fourteen (56%) articles reported on all five fidelity components. There was high variation in the way each component was conducted and/or reported, making comparisons across articles difficult. To address the prevailing limitation that the majority of MBI efficacy studies did not detail treatment fidelity, we offer the Treatment Fidelity Tool for MBIs adapted from the BCC guidelines to help researchers monitor and report these methods and measures in a simple and standardized format. By using this tool, researchers have the opportunity to improve the transparency and interpretability of the MBI evidence base.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Afton Kechter
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine,
University of Southern California, California
| | - Hortensia Amaro
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine,
University of Southern California, California
- Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, University of Southern
California, California
| | - David S. Black
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine,
University of Southern California, California
- Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, University of Southern
California, California
- Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, California
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Milazi M, Douglas C, Bonner A. A bundled phosphate control intervention (4Ds) for adults with end-stage kidney disease receiving haemodialysis: A cluster randomized controlled trial protocol. J Adv Nurs 2018; 74:2431-2441. [PMID: 29943430 DOI: 10.1111/jan.13774] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2018] [Revised: 04/19/2018] [Accepted: 05/02/2018] [Indexed: 03/22/2024]
Abstract
AIM To evaluate the effectiveness of a bundled self-management intervention (Taking control of your phosphate with the 4Ds) to improve phosphate control among adults receiving haemodialysis. BACKGROUND Hyperphosphataemia occurs in end-stage kidney disease and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. While hyperphosphataemia can be managed through four methods (food, drinks, drugs and dialysis) adherence to these methods is challenging for patients. Studies also tend to focus on one method of phosphate control rather than bundling all methods together into a theoretically driven intervention. DESIGN A multisite cluster randomized controlled trial with repeated measures. METHODS Adults receiving haemodialysis with high serum phosphate levels (>1.6 millimoles per litre for at least 3 months) will be cluster randomized to standard care or intervention according to haemodialysis treatment shift. Informed by social cognitive theory, the intervention focuses on improving self-efficacy and incorporates the "teach-back" method of patient education. The intervention brings together essential phosphate control strategies of diet, drinks, drugs (phosphate binders) and dialysis prescription in a 12-week self-management education programme. The primary outcome is serum phosphate level. Secondary outcomes are knowledge of and adherence to phosphate control strategies and self-efficacy for managing kidney disease. DISCUSSION Efforts to improve phosphate control have been undertaken although the optimal approach remains unclear. This study will make an important contribution to building an evidence base of phosphate control nursing intervention that can be delivered during routine haemodialysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Number ACTRN12617000703303.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Molly Milazi
- School of Nursing, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, 4059, Australia
- Kidney Health Service, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Brisbane, Queensland, 4059, Australia
| | - Clint Douglas
- School of Nursing, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, 4059, Australia
| | - Ann Bonner
- School of Nursing, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, 4059, Australia
- Kidney Health Service, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Brisbane, Queensland, 4059, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Oermann MH, Nicoll LH, Chinn PL, Conklin JL, McCarty M, Amarasekara S. Quality of Author Guidelines in Nursing Journals. J Nurs Scholarsh 2018; 50:333-340. [PMID: 29645403 PMCID: PMC5969104 DOI: 10.1111/jnu.12383] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/28/2017] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
Purpose The aims of this study were to (a) describe the information provided in author guidelines in nursing journals, (b) assess the completeness of this information, and (c) identify the extent and types of reporting guidelines used in nursing journals. Design Content analysis of author guidelines for 245 nursing journals included in the Directory of Nursing Journals maintained at the International Academy of Nursing Editors website. Methods Using Research Electronic Data Capture, data on 19 criteria for completeness were extracted from published author guidelines. Additional details about journal requirements, such as allowed length of manuscripts and format for the abstract, were also recorded. Reliability was established by simultaneous review of 25 journals (10%) by the research assistant and a senior member of the research team. Findings Author guidelines were easily accessible at journal websites or through links to download the information. A majority (73.5%) had completeness scores of 75% or higher; six journals had guidelines that were 100% complete. Half of the journals used the American Psychological Association reference style, and 26.3% used the American Medical Association style. Less than one fourth had stated requirements to use reporting guidelines such as Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA). Conclusions Author guidelines for nursing journals are generally complete and informative. Although specific reporting guidelines such as CONSORT and PRISMA improve the accuracy and completeness of manuscripts on various types of studies, most nursing journals do not indicate use of these for manuscript preparation. Editors who want to improve their author guidelines should use the 19 criteria for completeness as a gauge for updating and revision. Clinical Relevance Nurses rely on the published literature to inform their practice and ensure that it is based on evidence. Guidelines for publishing in the scholarly literature assist clinicians and scholars to ensure that published articles are complete, current, concise, and accurate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marilyn H Oermann
- Thelma M. Ingles Professor of Nursing, Director of Evaluation and Educational Research, Duke University School of Nursing; Editor, Nurse Educator and Journal of Nursing Care Quality, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Leslie H Nicoll
- Editor-in-Chief, CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing and Nurse Author & Editor, President and Owner, Maine Desk LLC, Portland, ME, USA
| | - Peggy L Chinn
- Editor, Advances in Nursing Science; Professor Emerita, University of Connecticut School of Nursing, Storrs, CT, USA
| | - Jamie L Conklin
- Research & Education Librarian, Liaison to the School of Nursing, Duke University Medical Center Library & Archives, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Midori McCarty
- Clinical Research Coordinator, Duke Office of Clinical Research, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Adams YJ, Kamp K, Liu CC, Stommel M, Thana K, Broome ME, Smith B. Revisiting the Quality of Reporting Randomized Controlled Trials in Nursing Literature. J Nurs Scholarsh 2017; 50:200-209. [PMID: 29266760 DOI: 10.1111/jnu.12368] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/16/2017] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To examine and update the literature on the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as reported in top nursing journals, based on manuscripts' adherence to the CONsolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines. DESIGN Descriptive review of adherence of RCT manuscript to CONSORT guidelines. METHODS Top 40 International Scientific Indexing (ISI) ranked nursing journals that published 20 or more RCTs between 2010 and 2014, were included in the study. Selected articles were randomly assigned to four reviewers who assessed the quality of the articles using the CONSORT checklist. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. FINDINGS A total of 119 articles were included in the review. The mean CONSORT score significantly differed by journal but did not differ based on year of publication. The least consistently reported items included random allocation, who randomly assigned participants and whether those administering the interventions were blinded to group assignment. CONCLUSIONS Although progress has been made, there is still room for improvement in the quality of RCT reporting in nursing journals. Special attention must be paid to how adequately studies adhere to the CONSORT prior to publication in nursing journals. CLINICAL RELEVANCE Evidence from (RCTs) are thought to provide the best evidence for evaluating the impact of treatments and interventions by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Since the evidence may be used for the development of clinical practice guidelines, it is critical that RCTs be designed, conducted, and reported appropriately and precisely.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yenupini Joyce Adams
- Alpha Psi, Registered Nurse, Wellstar Health System, Cobb Hospital, Austell, GA, USA.,Alpha Psi, Doctoral Candidate, College of Nursing, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
| | - Kendra Kamp
- Alpha Psi, Doctoral Candidate, College of Nursing, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
| | - Cheng Ching Liu
- Assistant Professor, College of Nursing, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
| | - Manfred Stommel
- Professor, College of Nursing, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
| | - Kanjana Thana
- Doctoral Student, College of Nursing, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
| | - Marion E Broome
- Beta Epsilon, Dean and Vice Chancellor for Nursing Affairs, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Barbara Smith
- Alpha Psi, Professor, College of Nursing, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Smith GD, Gelling L, Haigh C, Barnason S, Allan H, Penny K, Jackson D. Transparency in the reporting of nursing research. J Clin Nurs 2017; 27:475-477. [DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14212] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Carol Haigh
- Manchester Metropolitan University Manchester UK
| | - Sue Barnason
- University of Nebraska Medical Center Lincoln, Nebraska USA
| | | | - Kay Penny
- Edinburgh Napier University Edinburgh UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Zeng N, Zou C, He Z, Ma H, Ou X, You H, Kong Y, Jia J. Systematic review on the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in patients with hepatitis B or C in China. Int J Infect Dis 2017; 67:58-64. [PMID: 29138012 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2017.11.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2017] [Revised: 10/31/2017] [Accepted: 11/03/2017] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The numbers of articles reporting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on viral hepatitis in China have been increasing, but there have been few systematic studies evaluating the reporting quality of RCTs in this field. This study was performed to assess the reporting quality of RCTs on the treatment of hepatitis B and C in China from 1991 to 2015. METHODS Articles published between January 1991 and December 2015 were identified via the PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase databases using the key words "randomized clinical trials", "treatment", "therapy", "hepatitis B", "HBV", "hepatitis C", "HCV", "China", and "Chinese". The reporting quality was assessed against the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist. RESULTS In total, 211 RCTs on the treatment of hepatitis B or C were included. The number of articles focusing on these RCTs increased rapidly over time, while the reporting quality improved steadily over time. Overall, compliance with the key components of the CONSORT checklist was low, with only 8.5%, 3.8%, and 11.4% of the articles fulfilling the reporting requirements of randomization, allocation concealment, and blinding, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Both the number and the quality of RCT articles were found to have increased steadily over the last two decades. However, compliance with the key components of the CONSORT checklist still needs improvement. It is hoped that the results of this study will lead to improvements in the reporting quality of clinical trials on hepatitis B and C in China.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Na Zeng
- Clinical Epidemiology and EBM Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease, Beijing, China
| | - Cailun Zou
- Liver Research Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Liver Cirrhosis, National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease, Beijing, China
| | - Zhiying He
- Liver Research Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Liver Cirrhosis, National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease, Beijing, China
| | - Hong Ma
- Liver Research Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Liver Cirrhosis, National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease, Beijing, China
| | - Xiaojuan Ou
- Liver Research Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Liver Cirrhosis, National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease, Beijing, China
| | - Hong You
- Liver Research Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Liver Cirrhosis, National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease, Beijing, China
| | - Yuanyuan Kong
- Clinical Epidemiology and EBM Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease, Beijing, China.
| | - Jidong Jia
- Liver Research Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Liver Cirrhosis, National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease, Beijing, China.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Kumar S, Mohammad H, Vora H, Kar K. Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials of Periodontal Diseases in Journal Abstracts-A Cross-sectional Survey and Bibliometric Analysis. J Evid Based Dent Pract 2017; 18:130-141.e22. [PMID: 29747793 DOI: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2017.08.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/26/2016] [Revised: 08/14/2017] [Accepted: 08/28/2017] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by proper design, conduct, analysis, and reporting provide reliable information in clinical care. Reporting of RCT abstracts is of equal importance as there is evidence that many clinicians will change their clinical decisions based on RCT abstracts. The reporting quality of RCT abstracts has been suboptimal. It is not clear whether the reporting quality is related to the journal metrics. The main objective of this study is to conduct a cross-sectional survey to evaluate the reporting quality of RCTs of periodontal diseases in journal abstracts and to perform a bibliometric analysis. The null hypothesis was that there is no association between the journal metrics (5-year impact factor, Eigenfactor score, and Article Influence Score), abstract metrics (word count, and number of authors), journal endorsement of Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT), and the overall quality of reporting of CONSORT RCT abstract-modified checklist questions. MATERIALS CONSORT RCT abstract extension checklist with explanation and elaboration was used and modified to assess the quality of reporting of RCT abstracts of periodontal diseases in the journal abstracts in the year 2012. Bibliometric analysis of journal metrics (5-year impact factor, Eigenfactor score, and Article Influence Score) and abstract metrics (number of authors and abstract word count), the geographic distribution, and the CONSORT-endorsing journal abstracts was compared with the reporting quality of RCT abstracts in periodontal diseases. Calibration and intrarater agreement were done before the data collection and analysis. A second reviewer was consulted for independent evaluation and clarification as needed. For descriptive analysis, the values of continuous variables were expressed as median and interquartile ranges (IQRs) and as proportion percent for binary categorical variables. For association analysis between the binary (yes/no) response variable and the continuous variable, the Mann-Whitney test (for independent samples) was used. For examining the association between 2 categorical variables, Fisher's exact test was used. The chi-square test was performed to examine the association between 2 sets of binary response variables (yes/no). A P value of < .05 was considered statistically significant. All analyses were conducted using SAS, version 9.4. RESULTS A total of 198 RCT abstracts of periodontal diseases in the year 2012 from 57 journals were included in the study. Fifteen journals, listed as endorsers of CONSORT, contributed 108 RCT abstracts. Four journals (Journal of Periodontology, Journal of Clinical Periodontology, Clinical Oral Implants Research, and European Journal of Oral Implantology) contributed 84 of 198 RCT abstracts in 2012. European countries contributed the majority (n = 81, 40.91%) of RCT abstracts. Among 31 countries in this study, United States contributed the most RCTs (n = 28, 14.14%) followed by India (24, 12.12%), Italy (n = 22, 11.11%), and Brazil (n = 20, 10.1%). The frequency of journal metrics were 5-year impact factor (median 2.316; IQR: 1.439-2.970); Eigenfactor score (0.00474; 0.00202-0.01395); and Article Influence Score (0.553; 0.382-0.755). The number of authors in 198 RCT abstracts ranged between 2 and 20 (median n = 5, IQR: 4-6), whereas the word count ranged between 48 and 569 (median 235, IQR: 205-269). All RCT abstracts reported the experimental interventions (checklist question #5, frequency 100%). Some items were almost always reported-participant eligibility criteria (#3, 99%); comparison interventions (#6, 99.5%); specific objective or hypothesis (#7, 99.5%); primary outcome (#8, 99.5%); and reporting trial results as a summary (#16, 98.5%). All RCT abstracts never reported how the allocations were concealed (#11, 0) and the source of funding for the trials (#23, 0). Some items were almost always never reported-the number of participants included in the analysis for each intervention (#15, 2%); trial registration number (#21, 2.5%); name of trial register (#22, 2.5%); and how the randomization or sequence generation was done (#22). Dismal reporting was noted in many checklist questions including the identification of the study as randomized in the title #1, 51%; design of the trial #2, 32.8%; trial setting #4, 3.5%; randomization #10, 3.5%; blinding #12, 21.7%; details about blinding #13, 8.1%; number of participants randomized to each intervention #14, 26.3%; effect size #17, 13.6%; precision of the estimate of the effect #18, 6.1%; and adverse effects #19, 14.1%. Strikingly, there was a very high reporting of statistical significance #25, 92.4%. European countries, in particular, reported relatively better than other countries in essential questions such as #17 effect size reporting, and #18 precision (uncertainty), which have been largely unreported by rest of the countries. Finally, despite the majority of RCTs published in 2012 were by CONSORT-endorsing journals, there was no difference in the quality of reporting in majority of checklist items when compared with journals not listed as CONSORT endorsers. With few exceptions, there was no statistically significant association between the majority of the CONSORT RCT abstract checklist questions and the journal metrics and abstract metrics analyzed in this study. Unexpectedly, lower ranking journals in journal metrics reported certain essential checklist questions relatively better. CONCLUSION The reporting quality of RCT of periodontal diseases in the journal abstracts published in 2012 needs substantial improvement. These items have been laid out in this study to help all stakeholders-authors, clinicians, researchers, peer reviewers, journal editors, and publishers to take note and help with the improvement of the same. Despite few significant associations in the bibliometric factors analyzed with better reporting, the results overall led to the failure to reject the null hypothesis that there is no association between the journal metrics, word count, and number of authors and the quality of reporting of CONSORT RCT abstract-modified checklist questions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Satish Kumar
- Department of Periodontics and Preventive Dentistry, University of Pittsburgh School of Dental Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
| | | | - Hita Vora
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Kian Kar
- Division of Periodontology, Diagnostic Sciences and Dental Hygiene, Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Gray R, Badnapurkar A, Hassanein E, Thomas D, Barguir L, Baker C, Jones M, Bressington D, Brown E, Topping A. Registration of randomized controlled trials in nursing journals. Res Integr Peer Rev 2017; 2:8. [PMID: 29451553 PMCID: PMC5803636 DOI: 10.1186/s41073-017-0036-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2017] [Accepted: 05/15/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Trial registration helps minimize publication and reporting bias. In leading medical journals, 96% of published trials are registered. The aim of this study was to determine the proportion of randomized controlled trials published in key nursing journals that met criteria for timely registration. METHODS We reviewed all RCTs published in three (two general, one mental health) nursing journals between August 2011 and September 2016. We classified the included trials as: 1. Not registered, 2. Registered but not reported in manuscript, 3. Registered retrospectively, 4. Registered prospectively (before the recruitment of the first subject into the trial). 5. Timely registration (as 4 but the trial identification number is reported in abstract). RESULTS We identified 135 trials published in the three included journals. The majority (n = 78, 58%) were not registered. Thirty-three (24%) were retrospectively registered. Of the 24 (18%) trials that were prospectively registered, 11 (8%) met the criteria for timely registration. CONCLUSIONS There is an unacceptable difference in rates of trial registration between leading medical and nursing journals. Concerted effort is required by nurse researchers, reviewers and journal editors to ensure that all trials are registered in a timely way.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard Gray
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia
| | | | - Eman Hassanein
- Academic Health System, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
| | - Donna Thomas
- Academic Health System, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
| | - Laileah Barguir
- Academic Health System, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
| | - Charley Baker
- School of Health Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Martin Jones
- Department of Rural Health, The University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Daniel Bressington
- School of Nursing, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region of China
| | - Ellie Brown
- Impact SRC, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Annie Topping
- Academic Health System, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
- Institute of Clinical Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Tam WWS, Lo KKH, Khalechelvam P. Endorsement of PRISMA statement and quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in nursing journals: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2017; 7:e013905. [PMID: 28174224 PMCID: PMC5306529 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013905] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Systematic reviews (SRs) often poorly report key information, thereby diminishing their usefulness. Previous studies evaluated published SRs and determined that they failed to meet explicit criteria or characteristics. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was recommended as a reporting guideline for SR and meta-analysis (MA), but previous studies showed that adherence to the statement was not high for SRs published in different medical fields. Thus, the aims of this study are twofold: (1) to investigate the number of nursing journals that have required or recommended the use of the PRISMA statement for reporting SR, and (2) to examine the adherence of SRs and/or meta-analyses to the PRISMA statement published in nursing journals. DESIGN A cross-sectional study. METHODS Nursing journals listed in the ISI journal citation report were divided into 2 groups based on the recommendation of PRISMA statement in their 'Instruction for Authors'. SRs and meta-analyses published in 2014 were searched in 3 databases. 37 SRs and meta-analyses were randomly selected in each group. The adherence of each item to the PRISMA was examined and summarised using descriptive statistics. The quality of the SRs was assessed by Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews. The differences between the 2 groups were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS Out of 107 nursing journals, 30 (28.0%) recommended or required authors to follow the PRISMA statement when they submit SRs or meta-analyses. The median rates of adherence to the PRISMA statement for reviews published in journals with and without PRISMA endorsement were 64.9% (IQR: 17.6-92.3%) and 73.0% (IQR: 59.5-94.6%), respectively. No significant difference was observed in any of the items between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS The median adherence of SRs and meta-analyses in nursing journals to PRISMA is low at 64.9% and 73.0%, respectively. Nonetheless, the adherence level of nursing journals to the PRISMA statement does not significantly vary whether they endorse or recommend such a guideline.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wilson W S Tam
- Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Kenneth K H Lo
- JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong
| | - Parames Khalechelvam
- Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Strandell-Laine C, Saarikoski M, Löyttyniemi E, Salminen L, Suomi R, Leino-Kilpi H. Effectiveness of a mobile cooperation intervention during the clinical practicum of nursing students: a parallel group randomized controlled trial protocol. J Adv Nurs 2017; 73:1502-1514. [DOI: 10.1111/jan.13238] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/21/2016] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Leena Salminen
- Department of Nursing Science; University of Turku; Finland
| | - Reima Suomi
- Information Systems Science; Department of Management and Entrepreneurship; University of Turku; Finland
| | - Helena Leino-Kilpi
- Department of Nursing Science; University of Turku; Finland
- Turku University Hospital; Finland
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Mita G, Ni Mhurchu C, Jull A. Effectiveness of social media in reducing risk factors for noncommunicable diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Nutr Rev 2016; 74:237-47. [PMID: 26946250 DOI: 10.1093/nutrit/nuv106] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The primary aim of the current study was to synthesize evidence of the effect of social media use compared with no social media use as part of interventions to reduce risk factors for noncommunicable diseases. DATA SOURCES Databases were searched up to June 10, 2014, using medical subject headings. A secondary aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of social media use compared with no social media use in reducing the risk factors for noncommunicable diseases, stratifying the results by the extent of bias on outcomes, by social media use alone, and by the levels of social presence and media richness. STUDY SELECTION Sixteen trials (n=10,711 participants) met the inclusion criteria, but interventions mostly used social media with low levels of media richness and presence (e.g., discussion boards, bulletin boards). DATA SYNTHESIS Meta-analysis of all trials showed no significant differences (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.14; 95%CI -0.28 to 0.01), with similar findings for physical activity (SMD 0.07; 95%CI -0.25 to 0.38), body weight (SMD 0.07; 95%CI -0.17 to 0.20), and fruit and vegetable intake (SMD 0.39; 95%CI -0.11 to 0.89). Trials assessing social media interventions aimed at modifying risk factors for noncommunicable diseases showed that social media use improved the primary outcomes, but the overall quality of the included studies limits the generalizability of these findings. CONCLUSION Further trials are warranted, especially to isolate the effect of social media use and to fully evaluate the effect of the social presence and media richness of social media platforms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- George Mita
- G. Mita is with the School of Population Health, University of Auckland, New Zealand. C. Ni Mhurchu is with the National Institute for Health Innovation, University of Auckland, New Zealand. A Jull is with the School of Nursing and National Institute for Health Innovation, University of Auckland, New Zealand.
| | - Cliona Ni Mhurchu
- G. Mita is with the School of Population Health, University of Auckland, New Zealand. C. Ni Mhurchu is with the National Institute for Health Innovation, University of Auckland, New Zealand. A Jull is with the School of Nursing and National Institute for Health Innovation, University of Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Andrew Jull
- G. Mita is with the School of Population Health, University of Auckland, New Zealand. C. Ni Mhurchu is with the National Institute for Health Innovation, University of Auckland, New Zealand. A Jull is with the School of Nursing and National Institute for Health Innovation, University of Auckland, New Zealand
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Riley SP, Swanson B, Brismée JM, Sawyer SF. A systematic review of orthopaedic manual therapy randomized clinical trials quality. J Man Manip Ther 2016; 24:241-252. [PMID: 27956817 DOI: 10.1080/10669817.2015.1119372] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objectives: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in the orthopaedic manual therapy (OMT) literature from January 2010 to June 2014 in order to determine if the CONSORT checklist and Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) assessment tools: (1) are reliable; (2) have improved the reporting and decreased the risk of bias in RCTs in the OMT literature; (3) differ based on journal impact factor (JIF); and (4) scores are associated with each other. Background: The CONSORT statement is used to improve the accuracy of reporting within RCTs. The Cochrane RoB tool was designed to assess the risk of bias within RCTs. To date, no evaluation of the quality of reporting and risk of bias in OMT RCTs has been published. Methods: Relevant RCTs were identified by a literature review from January 2010 to June 2014. The identified RCTs were assessed by two individual reviewers utilizing the 2010 CONSORT checklist and the RoB tool. Agreement and a mean composite total score for each tool were attained in order to determine if the CONSORT and RoB tools were reliable and varied by year and impact factor. Results: A total of 72 RCTs in the OMT literature were identified. A number of categories within the CONSORT and RoB tools demonstrated prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK) scores of less than 0.20 and from 0.20 to 0.40. The total CONSORT and RoB scores were correlated to each other (r = 0.73; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.82; p < 0.0001). There were no statistically significant differences in CONSORT or RoB scores by year. There was a statistically significant correlation between both CONSORT scores and JIF (r = 0.64, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.76; p < 0.0001), and between RoB scores and JIF (r = 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.21-0.60; p < 0.001). There was not a statistically significant correlation between JIF and year of publication. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the CONSORT and RoB have a number of items that are unclear and unreliable, and that the quality of reporting in OMT trials has not improved in recent years. Improvements in reporting are necessary to allow advances in OMT practice. Level of Evidence: 1A.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sean P Riley
- Department of Rehabilitation Services and Sports Medicine, Uconn Health, Farmington, CT, USA; Physical Therapy Program, Storrs, CT, USA
| | - Brian Swanson
- Department of Physical Therapy, University of New England, Portland, ME, USA
| | - Jean-Michel Brismée
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences and Center for Rehabilitation Research, School of Health Professions, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX, USA
| | - Steven F Sawyer
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences and Center for Rehabilitation Research, School of Health Professions, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Ensuring the reporting quality of publications in nursing journals: A shared responsibility? Int J Nurs Stud 2015; 52:1025-8. [PMID: 25794948 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.02.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2015] [Accepted: 02/10/2015] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
|